Best News Money Can Buy
INTERNET NEWS CENSORSHIP
The Best News Money Can Buy
By Jim Putnam
The cyber world of the Internet, for all the talk about being the epitome of freedom of expression in the world, has demonstrated an insatiable appetite for censorship and profiteering that must be the envy of the cash starved news media of America and the rest of the world.
While millions or maybe even billions of web sites now reside on the Internet, public access to news outlets is getting more restricted, more controlled and more filtered than ever before. The First Amendment of the US Constitution, the Bill of Rights guaranteeing the freedom of the press, has never been farther from free.
Those mysterious forces that seem to control the flow of Internet news information to the public have built walls and barricades to literally assure that Internet news is now replacing television news as the best news money can buy.
Once upon a time in America anyone with a story to tell could get access to the news media. If that story contained hard news the media competed to tell it. When news became slanted, “yellow journalism”, the government and the courts stepped in to stop the illegal practices. Watchdog agencies were formed to keep an eye on the media, make the media as accountable as the stories they reported.
Competition between the television networks for ratings meant new challenges for breaking news and instances of abuse sometimes drove networks to break stories that were not true. Cable news competition was another nail in the coffin of freedom of the press, as their own ratings race brought another wave of distortions and occasional fraud to steal headlines and increase ratings.
But the Internet seems to have dropped all claims that news is anything but a profit center. What is covered is not necessarily what is the truth, or most interesting or informative to the public, but what will drive the most hits to the advertisers on the news web sites.
There are more than a few truths being withheld from the public. One of them is that the Internet is not and never has been a financially successful undertaking for most companies. Since most people will not pay for news subscriptions on the Internet, news sites are dependent for revenue from other sources, much like television and newspapers sell advertising to underwrite news costs.
Of course there is a big difference. The Internet companies do not need reporters to track down news and have no interest in “tips” from the public. Many major Internet news services will not even accept stories from the public. Now you have to pay one of the “registered” public relations agencies to submit your story to the news media, or it will not appear. In the traditional media, news releases from PR firms was always suspect, as it had everything to do with hyping agency clients and little relationship to news value.
Suddenly these very suspect sources control access to the most widely read news organizations in the world. The agencies, ever the confirmed capitalists, charge a fee structure that guarantees higher exposure for your story the more you are willing to pay. Since when did the money paid to promote a story dictate the news value and positioning?
Beyond this astonishing practice of rewarding the best news positions for stories to the highest bidder, the news web sites are packed with paid sponsors, paid advertising, paid pop ups, paid market research and a host of other hidden techniques to make money. In the end, the public reading the news faces more potential assaults on their right to privacy and confidentiality than any time in our history.
If they are to continue these deceptive practices the Internet news sites should be required to disclose their financial relationship with all agencies providing the “acceptable” news stories for publication. Any and all interlocking ownership or exclusive contracting relationship should be fully disclosed. Without such disclosure, we have payola all over again.
There should be full disclosure of all advertising revenues and sources of revenues by the Internet news services in order to protect the public from conflicts of interest. Finally, there should be Congressional hearings, as well as hearing by the Securities and Exchange Commission and Federal Trade Commission on the business practices of Internet news organizations.
Let us hope that for once Congress can do something right in media since they have failed to control campaign spending, failed to adopt legal campaign reform, and failed to stop the horrendous overcharges to political campaigns by the media. In the end, the public pays the bills for the campaign waste, bureaucratic bumbling, and government inefficiency.
From Ivy Hollow Media, Jim Putnam.
The Best News Money Can Buy
By Jim Putnam
The cyber world of the Internet, for all the talk about being the epitome of freedom of expression in the world, has demonstrated an insatiable appetite for censorship and profiteering that must be the envy of the cash starved news media of America and the rest of the world.
While millions or maybe even billions of web sites now reside on the Internet, public access to news outlets is getting more restricted, more controlled and more filtered than ever before. The First Amendment of the US Constitution, the Bill of Rights guaranteeing the freedom of the press, has never been farther from free.
Those mysterious forces that seem to control the flow of Internet news information to the public have built walls and barricades to literally assure that Internet news is now replacing television news as the best news money can buy.
Once upon a time in America anyone with a story to tell could get access to the news media. If that story contained hard news the media competed to tell it. When news became slanted, “yellow journalism”, the government and the courts stepped in to stop the illegal practices. Watchdog agencies were formed to keep an eye on the media, make the media as accountable as the stories they reported.
Competition between the television networks for ratings meant new challenges for breaking news and instances of abuse sometimes drove networks to break stories that were not true. Cable news competition was another nail in the coffin of freedom of the press, as their own ratings race brought another wave of distortions and occasional fraud to steal headlines and increase ratings.
But the Internet seems to have dropped all claims that news is anything but a profit center. What is covered is not necessarily what is the truth, or most interesting or informative to the public, but what will drive the most hits to the advertisers on the news web sites.
There are more than a few truths being withheld from the public. One of them is that the Internet is not and never has been a financially successful undertaking for most companies. Since most people will not pay for news subscriptions on the Internet, news sites are dependent for revenue from other sources, much like television and newspapers sell advertising to underwrite news costs.
Of course there is a big difference. The Internet companies do not need reporters to track down news and have no interest in “tips” from the public. Many major Internet news services will not even accept stories from the public. Now you have to pay one of the “registered” public relations agencies to submit your story to the news media, or it will not appear. In the traditional media, news releases from PR firms was always suspect, as it had everything to do with hyping agency clients and little relationship to news value.
Suddenly these very suspect sources control access to the most widely read news organizations in the world. The agencies, ever the confirmed capitalists, charge a fee structure that guarantees higher exposure for your story the more you are willing to pay. Since when did the money paid to promote a story dictate the news value and positioning?
Beyond this astonishing practice of rewarding the best news positions for stories to the highest bidder, the news web sites are packed with paid sponsors, paid advertising, paid pop ups, paid market research and a host of other hidden techniques to make money. In the end, the public reading the news faces more potential assaults on their right to privacy and confidentiality than any time in our history.
If they are to continue these deceptive practices the Internet news sites should be required to disclose their financial relationship with all agencies providing the “acceptable” news stories for publication. Any and all interlocking ownership or exclusive contracting relationship should be fully disclosed. Without such disclosure, we have payola all over again.
There should be full disclosure of all advertising revenues and sources of revenues by the Internet news services in order to protect the public from conflicts of interest. Finally, there should be Congressional hearings, as well as hearing by the Securities and Exchange Commission and Federal Trade Commission on the business practices of Internet news organizations.
Let us hope that for once Congress can do something right in media since they have failed to control campaign spending, failed to adopt legal campaign reform, and failed to stop the horrendous overcharges to political campaigns by the media. In the end, the public pays the bills for the campaign waste, bureaucratic bumbling, and government inefficiency.
From Ivy Hollow Media, Jim Putnam.
posted by Jim Putnam at 9:15 AM
0 comments
